OUR VIEW: To sniff or not to sniff

Published: Thursday, November 1, 2012 at 7:15 p.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, November 1, 2012 at 7:16 p.m.

Getting technical, dogs have 2 billion olfactory receptors in their noses, according to the American Kennel Club, compared to 40 million for the average human.

More simply, dogs have an incredible sense of smell — 100,000 times as acute as a human’s, according to the AKC.

Man long ago harnessed that canine ability to use in search and rescue and tracking operations.

More recently, dogs have become a useful law enforcement tool, able to detect explosives, blood, human remains and, most prominently, illegal drugs. Etowah County’s K-9 played a role in a huge methamphetamine seizure here last month.

Now, the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing two cases from Florida to see if such usage — forgive us — “passes the smell test.”

In one, a dog detected the scent of marijuana outside the door of a house near Miami. Police obtained a search warrant, found 179 pot plants and arrested the occupant. However, the trial judge tossed out the evidence, ruling the dog’s sniff was an unconstitutional intrusion. That decision ultimately was affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court.

In the other case, an attorney for a man arrested on meth charges after a K-9’s alert challenged the dog’s training and performance in the field. The Florida Supreme Court tossed out that evidence as well, ruling that just saying a dog is trained and certified isn’t enough to establish its credibility.

Decisions in both cases are expected next year, and officers here and elsewhere will be anxious to see if the court puts limits on the use of K-9s.

It’s impossible to gauge the justices’ mindset from their questions. However, there didn’t seem to be much sympathy for the state of Florida attorney’s arguments that those who have illegal items in their house should have no expectation of privacy, and that there’s no difference between a police officer sniffing for drugs during a traffic stop (which can establish probable cause for a search) and a K-9 sniffing at the door to a house.

The court in 2001 ruled officers couldn’t, without a warrant, use thermal imaging to find marijuana growing operations inside a house.

It wouldn’t surprise us to see the justices apply that precedent and require warrants before K-9s can be taken to a door, which would solve the constitutional issues (drugs are illegal and we support efforts to fight them, but wouldn’t really want to see officers walking the streets with sniffing K-9s without good reason), but would be at least a minor hindrance to law enforcement.

Opening the door to challenges of a dog’s olfactory reliability could be more problematic, keeping officers tied up in court instead of on the streets.

There are tales of K-9s alerting on places where no drugs are found, but more often than not they perform as advertised. And as a Justice Department lawyer told the court, if dogs are considered reliable enough to be used in other crucial ways, their reliability in searching for drugs also should be accepted.

<p>Getting technical, dogs have 2 billion olfactory receptors in their noses, according to the American Kennel Club, compared to 40 million for the average human.</p><p>More simply, dogs have an incredible sense of smell — 100,000 times as acute as a human's, according to the AKC.</p><p>Man long ago harnessed that canine ability to use in search and rescue and tracking operations.</p><p>More recently, dogs have become a useful law enforcement tool, able to detect explosives, blood, human remains and, most prominently, illegal drugs. Etowah County's K-9 played a role in a huge methamphetamine seizure here last month.</p><p>Now, the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing two cases from Florida to see if such usage — forgive us — “passes the smell test.”</p><p>In one, a dog detected the scent of marijuana outside the door of a house near Miami. Police obtained a search warrant, found 179 pot plants and arrested the occupant. However, the trial judge tossed out the evidence, ruling the dog's sniff was an unconstitutional intrusion. That decision ultimately was affirmed by the Florida Supreme Court.</p><p>In the other case, an attorney for a man arrested on meth charges after a K-9's alert challenged the dog's training and performance in the field. The Florida Supreme Court tossed out that evidence as well, ruling that just saying a dog is trained and certified isn't enough to establish its credibility.</p><p>Decisions in both cases are expected next year, and officers here and elsewhere will be anxious to see if the court puts limits on the use of K-9s.</p><p>It's impossible to gauge the justices' mindset from their questions. However, there didn't seem to be much sympathy for the state of Florida attorney's arguments that those who have illegal items in their house should have no expectation of privacy, and that there's no difference between a police officer sniffing for drugs during a traffic stop (which can establish probable cause for a search) and a K-9 sniffing at the door to a house.</p><p>The court in 2001 ruled officers couldn't, without a warrant, use thermal imaging to find marijuana growing operations inside a house.</p><p>It wouldn't surprise us to see the justices apply that precedent and require warrants before K-9s can be taken to a door, which would solve the constitutional issues (drugs are illegal and we support efforts to fight them, but wouldn't really want to see officers walking the streets with sniffing K-9s without good reason), but would be at least a minor hindrance to law enforcement. </p><p>Opening the door to challenges of a dog's olfactory reliability could be more problematic, keeping officers tied up in court instead of on the streets.</p><p>There are tales of K-9s alerting on places where no drugs are found, but more often than not they perform as advertised. And as a Justice Department lawyer told the court, if dogs are considered reliable enough to be used in other crucial ways, their reliability in searching for drugs also should be accepted.</p><p>In other words, the nose usually knows.</p>